Hi All, my thoughts are that 35 footers can get in most parks that will allow a conversion, what percentage of park spaces are there for 40'ers & 45', and what about 96" vs 102" anyone of you guys run across a park where that made a difference? Slide outs are common now, but do slideouts on conversions get restricted more than slideouts on S&S rigs? Has anyone run across a county, state or federal park that wouldn't allow a conversion, except for the older smaller parks where no bigger coaches can go. Boy, do I need a bus vacation, lvmci...

35 feet will probably get into all Fed Park campgrounds. Some campgrounds will protest but you are probably OK.40 feet are mostly OK in the western Fed Parks. You may have to hunt for a space but you can fit.45 feet. Can't drive in CA without an amended lic and only on certain roads.

I don't think slides are a problem in a conversion. Either the campground sites are wide enough for slides or they aren't. On a personal note I won't have a slide as I have seen too many problems with slides.

We started with 35 ft GM. Worked great lasted 10 years with us. Then went to a 40 ft because we wanted an auto trans vice the 4 speed stick.

When designing my truck conversion, I considered going to 45ft. But-there is definitely a line drawn that severely cuts down on the prospective RV parks you can stay in once you get over 40ft.I also wanted my wife to be able to drive it without a special license. As previously stated, here in California if you drive a 40ft or under, anyone can drive it with just a Class C license and on any road. If you have over a 40ft, you need a Class B non commercial license and are restricted to truck routes. Hence my truck conversion is 40ft.As to 96" vs 102" wide, no body notices. Without slides, the extra 6" width is very noticable inside.Check out an MCI102C3 Good Luck, TomC

In close to 10 years of bus travel we have never been turned away anywhere we wanted to stay - either because of size or because of the fact we are a bus. I did tell one park owner to go **** himself and we subsequently left that place under unpleasant circumstances but that's another story. We voluntarily choose not to try to go to some places that likely wouldn't let us in but we wouldn't go to those places anyway - we're fundamentally cheap. As far as length goes, there's individual sites in various parks that we simply don't fit into but that has never prevented us from finding a spot to stay. We fairly regularly have trouble finding a site that has a clear shot to the south for our satellite dishes but that's independant of our size. Sometimes the biggest challenge getting into a site is convincing the gate-droid that I can actually put the bus into a particular location.

In over 30 years of RV travel I can only remember one incident where I thought they might not let us in. We had an antique Rustler 5th wheel that we had just bought and were so proud of but it was a horrible old whore of a rig. We took off in January headed for L.A. and somewhere along the way - I don't even remember where now - we checked into a fairly high end park. They took a hard look at us and put us way in the back row where nobody could see us. We only stayed 2 nights and I was horrified to discover that my black tank was leaking which probably further served to confirm their initial impression of us.

Logged

R.J.(Bob) EvansUsed to be 1981 Prevost 8-92, 10 spdCurrently busless (and not looking)My websiteOur weblogSimply growing older is not the same as living.

There are limits to everything. So it's your decision. I don't think width is a problem. Prob more a difference where I go being over 35 than the fact of 40 or 45 in camp grounds. Sites are much more available for 35 and under. Turning radius on my 45XLE is the same as the 40 XL .I was surprised to find that out also. B-K Setra is even tighter. Really depends on where you like to go. Some people have both. Keep a shorter bus for tight remote places and a 40 or 45 for more spacious places. Pole to pole or boon-docking---or combo. do it your way. There is a place for you. As the other Bob said they want your $ only one place I couldn't get in was because bridge couldn't handle weight. Bob

35' or 40' hardly makes a difference I find. I don't remember anywhere that I went into with a 35' that I could not have squeezed a 40'.

A later model 40', such as the 102D3 I used to drive, have a much tighter turning radius than an older bus. I used to get around crowded shopping mall parking lots easier in the D3 (40'), than is possible in my 5C (35'), because in the difference in how they turn.

I have a question about turning radius. Is it not determined by both front wheel cut and length of wheel base? Now even though modern buses have a small turning radius, it appears to me that a 45 foot long wheelbase will mow a wider swath when making a short turn than a short wheelbase 35 footer. Am I missing something?

I don't have the figures with me, but the wheel base of a 40' isn't 5' longer than that of a 35'. The bigger buses have longer overhang behind the drive axle for room for the larger engine.

Even if the wheel base is longer, you can start turning the front wheels later to make a tight turn, so the rear axle clears an obstacle. And if you can't make it in one go, you only have to back up and go forward once with a tight radius bus, where an older bus would require 2 passes.

Once you get familiar with a bus, you can fit a 40' anywhere a 35' will go.

Mine is 40" 102 and I stay all over the us with out any problems. I look in the rv guide or on koa for places to stay. I was on the road over 8 weeks last summer and had no problems any where I Stayed, of course some of that time was at BK's thank you again, but I put over 15,000 miles on my coach and around 3000 on the truck.

Simple logic says that a smaller bus can go where a large one can not. We like going to National Forest campgrounds in our 35'. Often the same campgrounds will have sites on their maps that say they can accomodate a 40' or even 45'. However, what we have found is that, while that may be theoreticaly true since the site is 45' long, the road to get there would be impossible to use. We have been in such parks that we had to back out of the loop we where in because of almost 90 degree turns with massive trees on both sides and no way to turn around. One park we stayed at last summer by Sequoia was okay once inside it, but the road going up to it had several 180 switchbacks that a 40' may not have been able to make. Actually, as nice as the park was, I may not ever go back there because of the road. None of this would apply to most standard RV parks though.